Would LeBron's legacy have been better off missing the playoffs this year [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

Roundball_Rock

07-05-2014, 03:53 PM

Lebron23

07-05-2014, 03:56 PM

How about the conference finals? Or being a top team that lost in the semi-finals? Their argument is that if you make the Finals you have a team capable of winning a championship and therefore the loss counts against you. That logic is bizarre for many reasons and one is it ignores reality and posits that there are only two championship contenders in any given season. In reality there are 4-5 championship contenders in every season. According to them, though, the Thunder winning 60 games and losing in the WCF or the Clippers winning 57 games and losing in the WCSF is not a knock against Durant (1 Finals in 7 years) or Paul (9 years--never made it past the second round) despite them "leading" stacked teams because their teams did not reach the Finals. 5 Finals in 8 years and 6 ECF's in 8 years since turning 22 is somehow a failure. :lol

Repped. You are one of the smartest posters in this forum. Sometimes I wish Pippen could have won the MVP award in 1994, but hakeem owned the NBA in 1994.

LeJohn Janes

07-05-2014, 03:56 PM

How about the conference finals? Or being a top team that lost in the semi-finals? Their argument is that if you make the Finals you have a team capable of winning a championship and therefore the loss counts against you. That logic is bizarre for many reasons and one is it ignores reality and posits that there are only two championship contenders in any given season. In reality there are 4-5 championship contenders in every season. According to them, though, the Thunder winning 60 games and losing in the WCF or the Clippers winning 57 games and losing in the WCSF is not a knock against Durant (1 Finals in 7 years) or Paul (9 years--never made it past the second round) despite them "leading" stacked teams because their teams did not reach the Finals. 5 Finals in 8 years and 6 ECF's in 8 years since turning 22 is somehow a failure. :lol
I think this is one of the reasons it is so readily used against LeBron.

There are NO other contenders in the East.

zoom17

07-05-2014, 04:00 PM

PsychoBe

07-05-2014, 04:07 PM

How about the conference finals? Or being a top team that lost in the semi-finals? Their argument is that if you make the Finals you have a team capable of winning a championship and therefore the loss counts against you. That logic is bizarre for many reasons and one is it ignores reality and posits that there are only two championship contenders in any given season. In reality there are 4-5 championship contenders in every season. According to them, though, the Thunder winning 60 games and losing in the WCF or the Clippers winning 57 games and losing in the WCSF is not a knock against Durant (1 Finals in 7 years) or Paul (9 years--never made it past the second round) despite them "leading" stacked teams because their teams did not reach the Finals. 5 Finals in 8 years and 6 ECF's in 8 years since turning 22 is somehow a failure. :lol

you think people havent gave cp3 shit? :roll: :roll: :roll:

if bran had missed the playoffs with the talent around him he'd have to have a historically shitty season or an injury. the former would be embarrassing and the latter you can't use against him.

dubeta

07-05-2014, 04:10 PM

Bran 2/5 > Kobe 2/7 thats all we need to know

Roundball_Rock

07-05-2014, 04:10 PM

Repped. You are one of the smartest posters in this forum. Sometimes I wish Pippen could have won the MVP award in 1994, but hakeem owned the NBA in 1994.

Thanks. :cheers: People forget Pippen missed 10 games in 94' and the Bulls went 4-6 during that stretch--despite playing a soft schedule. If he played 82 games and the Bulls won the top seed he would have had a much stronger case. While Hakeem was the best player that year, Pippen was probably more valuable to his team since he led them in scoring, assists, steals, was their top defender, coach on the floor and their #2 rebounder (#1 in the playoffs).

I think this is one of the reasons it is so readily used against LeBron.

There are NO other contenders in the East.

If you accept that, then 2/5 is hypocritical...If one believes the Heat get a free pass to the Finals and would not be in the Finals if they were in the West then why treat the Heat losing in the Finals differently than the Thunder losing in the WCF or the Clippers losing in the WCSF? Their Finals appearances are a fluke, under this theory, due to the East being incredibly weak. Given that weakness--and how great the West is--how are the Heat (or Cavs) supposed to stand a chance against the juggernaut that beats the best of the best in the West?

The reality is Lebron's teams faced tougher competition in the East than people acknowledge--but his teams were clearly inferior to the Spurs in 2007 and 2014 when he got to the Finals. Any other player gets a pass for losing to a clearly superior team. People act as if the Pistons collapsed after 2007 but they had the second best record in the league at 59-23 the following year, made the ECF for the fifth consecutive season and played Boston tougher than the Lakers did. In 2012 the Celtics took the Heat to 7 games in the ECF. Again, people act as if that team was out of gas but they took the Heat to the brink--leading the series 3-2 and then holding a double digit lead in the fourth quarter of Game 7. That squad won 56 games in 2011, went to 7 games in the Finals in 2010, took the East champ to 7 games in the ECSF even without KG in 2009 and won 66 games and the title in 2008. They had a very good run from 2008-2012 and injuries arguably cost them two more rings. How about the Pacers? Yeah, the Pacers did not put up competition this year but they too took the Heat to 7 games in the ECF in 2013 and also gave the Heat a tough second round series in 2012. 2011 is the only year LeBron breezed through the East...

you think people havent gave cp3 shit?

How many Cp3 threads do you see on the first 10 pages? People post "2/5" threads daily here and there is a fleet of posters who will invoke it in any random LeBron thread.

if bran had missed the playoffs with the talent around him he'd have to have a historically shitty season or an injury.

What about if the Heat lost in the ECF this year and the Cavs in 2007? Then LeBron would be 2/3!

PsychoBe

07-05-2014, 04:13 PM

how many cp3 stans are there?

no better question.

who would want to be a cp3 stan? :roll: :roll: :roll:

i'd be embarassed to be one.

LeJohn Janes

07-05-2014, 04:22 PM

If you accept that, then 2/5 is hypocritical...If one believes the Heat get a free pass to the Finals and would not be in the Finals if they were in the West then why treat the Heat losing in the Finals differently than the Thunder losing in the WCF or the Clippers losing in the WCSF? Their Finals appearances are a fluke, under this theory, due to the East being incredibly weak. Given that weakness--and how great the West is--how are the Heat (or Cavs) supposed to stand a chance against the juggernaut that beats the best of the best in the West?

The reality is Lebron's teams faced tougher competition in the East than people acknowledge--but his teams were clearly inferior to the Spurs in 2007 and 2014 when he got to the Finals. Any other player gets a pass for losing to a clearly superior team. People act as if the Pistons collapsed after 2007 but they had the second best record in the league at 59-23 the following year, made the ECF for the fifth consecutive season and played Boston tougher than the Lakers did. In 2012 the Celtics took the Heat to 7 games in the ECF. Again, people act as if that team was out of gas but they took the Heat to the brink--leading the series 3-2 and then holding a double digit lead in the fourth quarter of Game 7. That squad won 56 games in 2011, went to 7 games in the Finals in 2010, took the East champ to 7 games in the ECSF even without KG in 2009 and won 66 games and the title in 2008. They had a very good run from 2008-2012 and injuries arguably cost them two more rings. How about the Pacers? Yeah, the Pacers did not put up competition this year but they too took the Heat to 7 games in the ECF in 2013 and also gave the Heat a tough second round series in 2012. 2011 is the only year LeBron breezed through the East...

For what it's worth, I agree to an extent. A player shouldn't be derided for making the finals and losing to a superior team. However at the end of the day, he colluded to make a 'super team' and had essentially a free pass to the finals in 2011 and 2014 and lost when it mattered on both occasions.

He's an easy target for abuse, but he brought that on himself when he formed the big 3 promising 7 titles in a weaker conference and has failed to get the job done.

Marchesk

07-05-2014, 05:00 PM

As opposed to making the Finals? Serious question for all the 2/5'ers out there, would LeBron missing the playoffs in the east with Wade & Bosh on his team have been better for his legacy?

No, but it would have been better if he had gone MJ in two of those three finals losses. Then he'd likely be 3/5, with this past one being a closer contest.

GODbe

07-05-2014, 05:12 PM

His legacy would've been better off if he won the finals. It's not that complicated, he's on one of the most stacked teams of all time.

2/5 with the teams he's had is disgraceful. :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

bukowski81

07-05-2014, 05:14 PM

How about the conference finals? Or being a top team that lost in the semi-finals? Their argument is that if you make the Finals you have a team capable of winning a championship and therefore the loss counts against you. That logic is bizarre for many reasons and one is it ignores reality and posits that there are only two championship contenders in any given season. In reality there are 4-5 championship contenders in every season. According to them, though, the Thunder winning 60 games and losing in the WCF or the Clippers winning 57 games and losing in the WCSF is not a knock against Durant (1 Finals in 7 years) or Paul (9 years--never made it past the second round) despite them "leading" stacked teams because their teams did not reach the Finals. 5 Finals in 8 years and 6 ECF's in 8 years since turning 22 is somehow a failure. :lol

The argument is that you are in the finals, just one more step to take all the glory and thats were truly great players should find a way to win more often than not. The drive and the determination to win the finals should be higher than a regular season game or a first round game and thats why loosing in the finals should be more damaging than loosing in any other instanse.

Im not saying I fully agree with that but at least I think thats the logic behind that argument.

tmacattack33

07-05-2014, 05:52 PM

I'm not sure anyone posting 2/5 is truly serious, and if they are and really think that in itself that means something, then that post is to be ignored as it shows 2nd or 3rd grade level thinking.

JellyBean

07-05-2014, 06:34 PM

No. Mainly because then folks would be negative towards LeBron for missing the playoffs with a "stacked" squad. The dude can't catch a break. He is danged if he does and danged if he doesn't.

kuniva_dAMiGhTy

07-05-2014, 06:45 PM

Is 6/6 and 5/7 better than 2/5 in the finals?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Sarcastic

07-05-2014, 06:56 PM

It would be better if he didn't join the Heat, make the claim that "dis gon be easy", say "not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7...", and then go on to lose 2 out of 4 finals.

Legends66NBA7

07-05-2014, 07:00 PM

James's legacy and career will only continue to be added to and will leap frog into the Hall of Fame.

Relax, guys.

STATUTORY

07-05-2014, 07:03 PM

Is 6/6 and 5/7 better than 2/5 in the finals?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
bran fans trying to reinvent simple arithmetic in order to circumvent this question

NZStreetBaller

07-05-2014, 07:17 PM

He's an easy target for abuse, but he brought that on himself when he formed the big 3 promising 7 titles in a weaker conference and has failed to get the job done.

THIS. big time. when you make promises/predictions its hero or villan do or die. If you fufill them you become the man if you fail to do so well you know what happens......

not to mention that lebron is also predicted to be the chosen one. with that being said people are going to expect him to be better then jordan so every time he falls short hes gonna get hell for it...

NZStreetBaller

07-05-2014, 07:20 PM

Lebron is a great player and has done very well full credit to him and his supporting cast. the only problem is....

Lebrons hype, expectations do not equal his current career performance.

tmacattack33

07-05-2014, 07:20 PM

Is 6/6 and 5/7 better than 2/5 in the finals?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

The question that the OP asks translates to "Is 2/4 + missing out on the playoffs better than 2/5 ?"

A simple Yes or No will suffice, and basically anyone with a brain has already said No.

DFish24

07-05-2014, 07:27 PM

2/5 wouldn't exist so yea.

kuniva_dAMiGhTy

07-05-2014, 07:36 PM

The question that the OP asks translates to "Is 2/4 + missing out on the playoffs better than 2/5 ?"

A simple Yes or No will suffice, and basically anyone with a brain has already said No.

You nor the op are very bright then, because all 2/5 implies is 2 of 5 finals won.

Nothing more, nothing less

PickernRoller

07-05-2014, 07:37 PM

Can't neg cause of the 24 hr limit. Saving one for OP.

Roundball_Rock

07-05-2014, 09:57 PM

For what it's worth, I agree to an extent. A player shouldn't be derided for making the finals and losing to a superior team. However at the end of the day, he colluded to make a 'super team' and had essentially a free pass to the finals in 2011 and 2014 and lost when it mattered on both occasions.

He's an easy target for abuse, but he brought that on himself when he formed the big 3 promising 7 titles in a weaker conference and has failed to get the job done.

I understand that. If people want to argue that he has underachieved in Miami I would disagree but that is a legitimate argument to make.

His legacy would've been better off if he won the finals. It's not that complicated, he's on one of the most stacked teams of all time.

My previous paragraph applies here as well. I do find it interesting, though, that a well past his prime Wade and Bosh, who is a 14/6 type at this point, and nothing much beyond that is deemed stacked by Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka (and previously also Harden) or Paul/Griffin/Jordan/Crawford/Reddick or the Rockets are not considered stacked.

The argument is that you are in the finals, just one more step to take all the glory and thats were truly great players should find a way to win more often than not. The drive and the determination to win the finals should be higher than a regular season game or a first round game and thats why loosing in the finals should be more damaging than loosing in any other instanse.

Im not saying I fully agree with that but at least I think thats the logic behind that argument.

Which would make sense if he sucked in the Finals (2007, when he was 22) or even under-performed (2011) but this year he was the only Heat to show up. He had 28/8/4/2 on 57/52/79. There was not much more he could have done, and even if he improved it would not have mattered since his team was losing by a double digit margin. The Heat were not even in the Spurs' zip code this year--and LeBron is blamed for this by many.

The dude can't catch a break. He is danged if he does and danged if he doesn't.

Half these people give him "half credit" for winning a ring last year!

I'm not sure anyone posting 2/5 is truly serious, and if they are and really think that in itself that means something, then that post is to be ignored as it shows 2nd or 3rd grade level thinking.

Sadly, I think a lot of them actually think 2/5 is some major failure...

Is 6/6 and 5/7 better than 2/5 in the finals?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Yes. 6/6 is interesting because the reason 6/6 exists is because that individual's team lost in consecutive years in the ECF (there also was a ECSF loss with a team that was 13-4 with him and had ended the year 21-6). Is 6/6 better than 6/8?

dubeta

07-05-2014, 09:59 PM

I have a question here is Robert Horry a top 3 goat?? the dude is 7/7

riseagainst

07-06-2014, 12:21 PM

2/5 bruh.

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 12:32 PM

I understand that. If people want to argue that he has underachieved in Miami I would disagree but that is a legitimate argument to make.

My previous paragraph applies here as well. I do find it interesting, though, that a well past his prime Wade and Bosh, who is a 14/6 type at this point, and nothing much beyond that is deemed stacked by Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka (and previously also Harden) or Paul/Griffin/Jordan/Crawford/Reddick or the Rockets are not considered stacked.

Which would make sense if he sucked in the Finals (2007, when he was 22) or even under-performed (2011) but this year he was the only Heat to show up. He had 28/8/4/2 on 57/52/79. There was not much more he could have done, and even if he improved it would not have mattered since his team was losing by a double digit margin. The Heat were not even in the Spurs' zip code this year--and LeBron is blamed for this by many.

Half these people give him "half credit" for winning a ring last year!

Sadly, I think a lot of them actually think 2/5 is some major failure...

Yes. 6/6 is interesting because the reason 6/6 exists is because that individual's team lost in consecutive years in the ECF (there also was a ECSF loss with a team that was 13-4 with him and had ended the year 21-6). Is 6/6 better than 6/8?

Clearly it's better to make the finals than lose before the finals. But people have to stop ignoring that not only has Lebron made less finals than Kobe and Jordan, but he's only won 2 of the 5 he's made.

There is a long way to go, but if his career stopped now. 5 finals and 2 titles simply does not compare to Jordan for example.

So this is just ignoring simplicity. Lebron has made 5 finals. That is great. Making the finals is always better than losing earlier.

Lebron has also won 2 titles and has 2 finals mvps. Again, this is great.

Then we just apply context and circumstances and look at shit.

It's not hard.

When people list 2/5...I really don't think they are criticizing Lebron for making the finals. Hell, if they missed the playoffs....we'd be hating on him for that.

Anyway...I'm in favor of the 2/5 thing because Lebron cost his team in the 11 finals...and that should always loom large for his legacy when compared against guys like Jordan and Duncan...etc.

Roundball_Rock

07-06-2014, 12:50 PM

Clearly it's better to make the finals than lose before the finals. But people have to stop ignoring that not only has Lebron made less finals than Kobe and Jordan, but he's only won 2 of the 5 he's made.

LeBron has played for 11 years; Kobe for 17 and Jordan played for 15. He has made 5 Finals compared to 6 for Jordan and 7 for Kobe. LeBron actually is getting to the Finals more frequently than either than Jordan and Kobe. While those guys are being invoked, Jordan lost three times in the first round--including two sweeps and another 1-3 loss--while Kobe lost in the first round in back-to-back seasons at his peak. LeBron has never lost in the first round.

You mentioned context, did LeBron play with prime and then peak Shaq to start his career? Did LeBron ever have a team capable of being a championship contender without him? That is the problem with looking strictly at rings. It ignores the situations particular players were in. How many rings would Jordan or Kobe have playing on the teams LeBron has been on?

Lebron has also won 2 titles and has 2 finals mvps. Again, this is great.

He also has 4 MVP's at age 29, one less than Jordan and Russell and one more than Bird, Magic and more than Shaq, Kobe, and Hakeem combined...

Anyway...I'm in favor of the 2/5 thing because Lebron cost his team in the 11 finals...

Yes--but absent him his team does not even sniff the Finals in 2007 and 2014. He can be criticized for 18/7/7 (rookie Magic's stat line--and some people credit him for "leading" the Lakers that year) but blaming him for struggling at age 22 against a vastly superior team or losing when averaging 28 points on 57% is applying a standard to him that is not applied to any other GOAT candidate.

Hakeem lost in the first round 8 times and missed the playoffs in another year in his prime and this is never invoked when Hakeem is discussed. He is generally placed in the same category as Shaq, Kobe, LeBron and Duncan--all players who achieved substantially more team success.

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 12:55 PM

LeBron has played for 11 years; Kobe for 17 and Jordan played for 15. He has made 5 Finals compared to 6 for Jordan and 7 for Kobe. LeBron actually is getting to the Finals more frequently than either than Jordan and Kobe. While those guys are being invoked, Jordan lost three times in the first round--including two sweeps and another 1-3 loss--while Kobe lost in the first round in back-to-back seasons at his peak. LeBron has never lost in the first round.

You mentioned context, did LeBron play with prime and then peak Shaq to start his career? Did LeBron ever have a team capable of being a championship contender without him? That is the problem with looking strictly at rings. It ignores the situations particular players were in. How many rings would Jordan or Kobe have playing on the teams LeBron has been on?

He also has 4 MVP's at age 29, one less than Jordan and Russell and one more than Bird, Magic and more than Shaq, Kobe, and Hakeem combined...

Yes--but absent him his team does not even sniff the Finals in 2007 and 2014. He can be criticized for 18/7/7 (rookie Magic's stat line--and some people credit him for "leading" the Lakers that year) but blaming him for struggling at age 22 against a vastly superior team or losing when averaging 28 points on 57% is applying a standard to him that is not applied to any other GOAT candidate.

Hakeem lost in the first round 8 times and missed the playoffs in another year in his prime and this is never invoked when Hakeem is discussed.

LOL...I know how long they've played. That is why I said "at this point"...

We can't start just giving Lebron titles and finals appearances in the future. All we know is what we know now. And to date...making 5 finals and 2 titles is not as impressive as other resumes. If you started only comparing the first 11 years of careers...than it would be.

Hakeem losing in the first round is brought up a ton. In fact, it's a telling stat about Hakeem (more about his teams honestly though), but it's a reason he's at the 9 or 10 range.

All you have to do is apply context. Again, it's not hard.

Bandito

07-06-2014, 12:56 PM

It would be better if he didn't join the Heat, make the claim that "dis gon be easy", say "not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5, not 6, not 7...", and then go on to lose 2 out of 4 finals.
This. One of the smartest post in this retarded thread.

DJ Leon Smith

07-06-2014, 02:45 PM

His legacy is intact regardless.

The legacy of a guy who was outscored by four other players in the 2011 NBA Finals and a guy who scored 8 points in a game in the 2014 Eastern Conference Finals. Oh and the legacy of a guy who led his team to the greatest point differential NBA Finals series defeat in NBA history.

kennethgriffin

07-06-2014, 02:53 PM

its about what you do in terms of expectations. Or what you do with what you have behind you

If the miami heat dodnt have 4 hall of famers and it was just lebron. then we would give him a pass for failing. But when youre built for not 1 not 2not 3 not 4 not 5 not 6 not 7 but 8 nba championships... then yes.. its a failure to lose in the finals..

sorry but no excuses

2 for 5

Roundball_Rock

07-06-2014, 03:12 PM

The legacy of a guy who was outscored by four other players in the 2011 NBA Finals

Magic's scoring rank in his Finals: 3rd (0.2 ahead of 4th), 5th--on his own team--7th overall, tied for 4th (0.5 ahead of 5th), 4th (0.4 ahead of 5th), 5th, 1st, 3rd, 7th (injured), 4th (narrowly ahead of Divac).

Bird in 1981: 3rd at 15.3 ppg, 0.3 ahead of 4th and 0.6 ahead of 5th.

KG in 2008: 4th.

Kobe in 2000: 4th.

Duncan in 2007: 3rd, 0.5 ahead of 4th place Manu.

Once again LeBron is held to a different standard than other legends.

And to date...making 5 finals and 2 titles is not as impressive as other resumes. If you started only comparing the first 11 years of careers...than it would be.

Sure--but currently no one has LeBron over Jordan and few people have him over Kobe so why are MJ and Kobe stans insecurely going around posting 6>2 or 5>2?

Hakeem losing in the first round is brought up a ton. In fact, it's a telling stat about Hakeem (more about his teams honestly though), but it's a reason he's at the 9 or 10 range.

9th-10th--with a group of players who experienced far more team success (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe and even at this point LeBron has had more team success than Hakeem did over his entire career). You don't hear people saying 5>2 or 4>2 or even 5/6>2/3 or 5/7>2/3 or 4/6=2/3 (in their bizarro world where all that matters is percentages 4/6=2/3 :oldlol: ) when those players are compared...

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 03:37 PM

Magic's scoring rank in his Finals: 3rd (0.2 ahead of 4th), 5th--on his own team--7th overall, tied for 4th (0.5 ahead of 5th), 4th (0.4 ahead of 5th), 5th, 1st, 3rd, 7th (injured), 4th (narrowly ahead of Divac).

Bird in 1981: 3rd at 15.3 ppg, 0.3 ahead of 4th and 0.6 ahead of 5th.

KG in 2008: 4th.

Kobe in 2000: 4th.

Duncan in 2007: 3rd, 0.5 ahead of 4th place Manu.

Once again LeBron is held to a different standard than other legends.

Sure--but currently no one has LeBron over Jordan and few people have him over Kobe so why are MJ and Kobe stans insecurely going around posting 6>2 or 5>2?

9th-10th--with a group of players who experienced far more team success (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe and even at this point LeBron has had more team success than Hakeem did over his entire career). You don't hear people saying 5>2 or 4>2 or even 5/6>2/3 or 5/7>2/3 or 4/6=2/3 (in their bizarro world where all that matters is percentages 4/6=2/3 :oldlol: ) when those players are compared...

Because, exactly like you said, Hakeem has played his entire career. Just wait until Lebron finishes his career and has Hakeem type longevity...do you really think people won't talk about the first round exits and how many MVP's Lebron has and finals appearances etc?

It's a fluid conversation and that is what makes comparing retired players to current players so hard. We've seen the complete Hakeem picture...we haven't seen it with Lebron.

To date I think Lebron has done enough to be in that Hakeem, Kobe...9 to 10 range.

But if you compare Lebron to guys above...well...only winning 2 out of 5 finals does hurt him at least a little. Especially when Lebron was dreadful in both the 07 and 11 finals.

It's like you can't separate the two. It's better to make the finals, but how one performs in the finals really does matter because the chances a often few and far between.

So making the 5 finals is great. Only winning 2 and playing like complete dog shit in 2 more is not that great when compared to the top 8 or so players of all time.

Again, you are making this way too complicated. And it's not like Lebron has consistently over achieved with teams making the finals or something. That happened once in 07. The other 4 times he's made the finals his teams were overwhelming favorites to do so.

It would be one thing if he was dragging the 07 through 10 Cavs to the finals year in year out, but again...he did that once.

Which is why the 07 finals won't really ultimately matter much. He gets huge points for getting there.

eSOL

07-06-2014, 04:09 PM

This thread is the most legit discussion thread ive seen on insidehoops in a long time.

OP please make more threads. Doesn't matter if its about LBJ or anyone...

:cheers:

Hey Yo

07-06-2014, 04:14 PM

The other 4 times he's made the finals his teams were overwhelming favorites to do so.
Not sure if they were favored over the Bulls in the 2011 ECF. Bulls had swept them in the reg. season and caused fits for some Heat players.

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 04:53 PM

Not sure if they were favored over the Bulls in the 2011 ECF. Bulls had swept them in the reg. season and caused fits for some Heat players.

They were favorites entering the series, but...I mean...come on

They had prime Lebron/Wade/Bosh and a top 5 offense and defense in the regular season.

Why do we all have to keep playing this game like they shouldn't be expected to beat the Bulls when reflecting back on things.

Hey Yo

07-06-2014, 05:08 PM

They were favorites entering the series, but...I mean...come on

They had prime Lebron/Wade/Bosh and a top 5 offense and defense in the regular season.

Why do we all have to keep playing this game like they shouldn't be expected to beat the Bulls when reflecting back on things.
You make it sound as if the Bulls were givin' no chance in that series.

I wasn't sure who was favored, just remembering all the clamor about how the 2011 Bulls swept the season series and had what it took to take down Miami in a 7 game series.

Black and White

07-06-2014, 05:08 PM

No, tbh LeBrons situation is rare in that he would get hated on regardless, winning was his only option.

IllegalD

07-06-2014, 05:42 PM

So now that LeBron keeps losing Finals like a b*tch and has a losing Finals record, the criteria is reshaped so that "just making the finals" is good enough now to consider someone GOAT-worthy?

ISH, dawg, Im tellin you... :roll:

Keep counting those meaningless, media-voted regular season MVPs and that inflated FG% that didn't mean shit against a real team like the Spurs.

Cause that's all you LeBron Stans have to hang your hat on these days.

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 07:01 PM

You make it sound as if the Bulls were givin' no chance in that series.

I wasn't sure who was favored, just remembering all the clamor about how the 2011 Bulls swept the season series and had what it took to take down Miami in a 7 game series.

I gave the Bulls a real chance. I actually might have picked them...I can't remember.

I'm not saying they had no chance at all. That wasn't my point.

ThePhantomCreep

07-06-2014, 07:17 PM

LeBron has played for 11 years; Kobe for 17 and Jordan played for 15. He has made 5 Finals compared to 6 for Jordan and 7 for Kobe. LeBron actually is getting to the Finals more frequently than either than Jordan and Kobe. While those guys are being invoked, Jordan lost three times in the first round--including two sweeps and another 1-3 loss--while Kobe lost in the first round in back-to-back seasons at his peak. LeBron has never lost in the first round.

You mentioned context, did LeBron play with prime and then peak Shaq to start his career? Did LeBron ever have a team capable of being a championship contender without him? That is the problem with looking strictly at rings. It ignores the situations particular players were in. How many rings would Jordan or Kobe have playing on the teams LeBron has been on?

He also has 4 MVP's at age 29, one less than Jordan and Russell and one more than Bird, Magic and more than Shaq, Kobe, and Hakeem combined...

Yes--but absent him his team does not even sniff the Finals in 2007 and 2014. He can be criticized for 18/7/7 (rookie Magic's stat line--and some people credit him for "leading" the Lakers that year) but blaming him for struggling at age 22 against a vastly superior team or losing when averaging 28 points on 57% is applying a standard to him that is not applied to any other GOAT candidate.

Hakeem lost in the first round 8 times and missed the playoffs in another year in his prime and this is never invoked when Hakeem is discussed. He is generally placed in the same category as Shaq, Kobe, LeBron and Duncan--all players who achieved substantially more team success.

Magic averaged 22/11/9 in the 1980 Finals. You could argue it was better than any of LeBron's finals performances, much LeBron's gagfest in 2011.

Roundball_Rock

07-06-2014, 07:40 PM

Magic averaged 22/11/9 in the 1980 Finals. You could argue it was better than any of LeBron's finals performances, much LeBron's gagfest in 2011.

He averaged 18/7/7 in the regular season and several people here credit him as being "the man" on the Lakers from year 1, despite KAJ putting up 25/11/5/3/1 (32/12/3/4/1 in the playoffs) and winning the MVP award. Is 18/7/7 something to be celebrated or denigrated?

Black and White

07-06-2014, 07:41 PM

Roundball_Rock

07-06-2014, 07:56 PM

Context means nothing to you does it? Do you really think LeBrons statline in the 2011 finals is the only reason why he gets bashed for it??

Of course not. LeBron is held to a higher standard than other legends and his performances are put under a microscope in a way that is not done with others (i.e. he would have 35 points but if 22 came in one quarter the overall result is diminished). Yeah, he sucked by his standards in the 2011 Finals--but it says something about the player in question when 18/7/7 is considered a terrible performance.

Cleverness

07-06-2014, 08:25 PM

2-3 or 2/5 has no logic behind it. It's only there to make people mad.

And it's working. :hammerhead:

Black and White

07-06-2014, 08:28 PM

Of course not. LeBron is held to a higher standard than other legends and his performances are put under a microscope in a way that is not done with others (i.e. he would have 35 points but if 22 came in one quarter the overall result is diminished). Yeah, he sucked by his standards in the 2011 Finals--but it says something about the player in question when 18/7/7 is considered a terrible performance.

Its not the fact that he scored 18/7/7 (which is low for his standards, or any great player tbh), its the fact that he flat out fell off a cliff on the biggest stage where he had Dwyane Wade literally asking him what the hell he was doing, any superstar goes ghost mode like that in his prime would get called out, without question.

dankok8

07-06-2014, 09:36 PM

ThePhantomCreep

07-06-2014, 10:04 PM

In 2007 and 2014 his team was clearly worse than the teams he faced in the finals. I fail to see how either loss is a detriment to his legacy. And it's funny how according to some people on here, losing in an earlier round is better! :roll:

The 2014 Heat played the Spurs worse than any of their three previous playoff opponents, but don't even pretend they were heavy underdogs a 'la the 2007 Cavaliers. That's bullshit.

guy

07-06-2014, 11:06 PM

He averaged 18/7/7 in the regular season and several people here credit him as being "the man" on the Lakers from year 1, despite KAJ putting up 25/11/5/3/1 (32/12/3/4/1 in the playoffs) and winning the MVP award. Is 18/7/7 something to be celebrated or denigrated?

Who? I've never heard anyone argue that Magic was a better player then Kareem in 1980.

You're incredibly stupid if you can't tell the difference between this and what Lebron did in 2011. In fact, I'm not sure how anyone who tries to defend Lebron's performance or understate how embarrassingly bad it was can be taken seriously.

DMAVS41

07-06-2014, 11:09 PM

Who? I've never heard anyone argue that Magic was a better player then Kareem in 1980.

You're incredibly stupid if you can't tell the difference between this and what Lebron did in 2011. In fact, I'm not sure how anyone who tries to defend Lebron's performance or understate how embarrassingly bad it was can be taken seriously.

Exactly.

It's like people have become accustomed to players getting like 10 legit chances in the finals for their careers. A lot of players, even the all time greats, only get a handful of chances at the title.

2011 remains the single worst performance in the finals I've seen from a GOAT type candidate in my life. Only Kobe in 04 could compare...and it's not as bad because the Lakers were getting blown out. The Heat in 11 were losing tight games...making the epic choke worse.

guy

07-06-2014, 11:32 PM

In 2007 and 2014 his team was clearly worse than the teams he faced in the finals. I fail to see how either loss is a detriment to his legacy. And it's funny how according to some people on here, losing in an earlier round is better! :roll:

About 2007, first of all, sure he doesn't deserve much criticism for losing. But he does deserve criticism for playing pretty terribly overall in that series, yet for the most part he gets a pass cause of his team and age. But regardless, he played terrible. 22/7/7 on 36% (yes, 36%) and 6 TOs per game is pretty bad for someone of his standard regardless of his age. Not to mention, some of those games were winnable games, which means the supporting cast really shouldn't deserve as much blame as they get for getting swept.

Second of all, its true that a player shouldn't be penalized for losing in the finals as opposed to an earlier round. Context should be taken. And with that said, people really should stop overrating Lebron leading that team to the Finals. The Eastern Conference from about 1999-2007 i.e. after Jordan's Bulls broke up and before the new big 3 in Boston formed, was incredibly bad. The Cavs played two .500 teams in the first 2 rounds and Lebron wasn't even that great throughout the playoffs. In fact, its probably one of his worst playoff runs overall. He had an amazing game 5 vs Detroit, in fact one of the greatest ever IMO, but its almost like people think thats how he played the whole damn playoffs. He shot less then 42% through the whole playoffs. In fact, you take that game 5 out of it, and he's shooting less then 43% in EACH of the 4 rounds. Obviously he did other things, but he obviously must have had more help then people act like he did for him to get away with shooting that badly. And as far as the Pistons go, they might've been the most unmotivated, complacent good team ever, which is why they lost the previous year in a similar way. Even Chris Webber who was on that team basically said that that locker room didn't give a f*ck about anything. I'm not saying Lebron doesn't deserve alot of credit for what he did. But lets not act like it was this impossible feat that no other all-time great could have accomplished under the same circumstances (In fact, AI and Jason Kidd, two clearly historically inferior players, pretty much did do what Lebron did under similar circumstances.)